Removing water marks on port glass?

[daniele 0]

On 8/4/2019 at 12:17 PM, mackman said:

Just rubbed with a microfiber drying towel I use to dry my car. One of the ones with a grid texture on it. Took a bit of effort but only about a minute for each piece of glass. Wiped it clean with a towel to inspect. Then when I was done ran it under the faucet to remove any remaining cleaner. 

Hey Mackman, I did it as you suggest. After drying it is shining. But after running water to clean it, everything looks pretty the same. Or little little improved. How many times should I repeat the "gesture"? 

[TimG 62]

A couple of other things that people have suggested before on WP: Brasso metal polish and... wait for it..... Coke.

I did wonder when I heard Coke if they weren't referring to drinking some whilst polishing away. But it destroys teeth and polishes pennies, so why not?

Brasso is a British thing but there's probably a similar product available elsewhere. It's brilliant for polishing brass and copper.

If you flip back through this post, you'll see I commented back in 2014 that for a flat port I had with weird marks, in the end I had to get it reglassed. Sometimes there just seems to be "stuff" in the water that impacts on the glass.

The other thing I wondered in retrospect is mould. If you've had the port somewhere with high humidity and mould growth sets in. I've lost a couple of lenses through mould growth having had them for about 12 months in Indonesia with high humidity. At least a port you can get reglassed relatively inexpensively!

 

 

[davehicks 123]

I've had success polishing spotty glass flat ports with Novus polish #2 (fine scratch) and a soft cloth.  It has enough grit the clean the glass and does not seem to scratch it. I tried a bunch of other things without luck so figured it was worth a try.  Seemed to work pretty well.

[Gudge 59]

I use Mothers California Gold Water Spot Remover For Glass, it works really well.  Has a combination of mild abrasives and mineral dissolving chemicals.

[TimG 62]

My Subal port for the 105mm lens is starting to develop that "bloom" now. I'll give Mother a go.....

[rlamarche 9]

Hi,

I wake up this topic because I've just used this product : https://www.amazon.fr/Glass-Polish-pare-brise-essuie-glace-accessoires/dp/B00ADMA8GQ/ref=asc_df_B00ADMA8GQ/ on my old WWL-1 which had a lot of water marks every-where (I did not dry it well after all dives), and the results were impressive. So I wanted to share it with you.

I did it with my hands (no drilling machine) and the provided pads (white side), and with very small efforts I've already removed almost every thing (not more than 30-45 minutes of rubbing). I don't remember where I did read about this product, maybe here but not on this topic ? The "Mothers WaterSpot Remover" dit not work for me, but I hadn't used any pad - just micro fibers a little rugged.

The only remaining marks are on the sides of the dome, near the lens hood. These parts are difficult to clean.

There were also a very small scratch near the center and it seems to have disapeared (or at least less visible when eye checking through the lens).

NOTE : I dit not yet tested it underwater, I will let you know but the water deposits marks were visible mostly when shooting in high contrast situations (sun in front, and big shadows/dark zones). But in air, there are no water deposits anymore in the center and around.

 

[ChrisRoss 150]

1 hour ago, rlamarche said:

Hi,

I wake up this topic because I've just used this product : https://www.amazon.fr/Glass-Polish-pare-brise-essuie-glace-accessoires/dp/B00ADMA8GQ/ref=asc_df_B00ADMA8GQ/ on my old WWL-1 which had a lot of water marks every-where (I did not dry it well after all dives), and the results were impressive. So I wanted to share it with you.

I did it with my hands (no drilling machine) and the provided pads (white side), and with very small efforts I've already removed almost every thing (not more than 30-45 minutes of rubbing). I don't remember where I did read about this product, maybe here but not on this topic ? The "Mothers WaterSpot Remover" dit not work for me, but I hadn't used any pad - just micro fibers a little rugged.

The only remaining marks are on the sides of the dome, near the lens hood. These parts are difficult to clean.

There were also a very small scratch near the center and it seems to have disapeared (or at least less visible when eye checking through the lens).

NOTE : I dit not yet tested it underwater, I will let you know but the water deposits marks were visible mostly when shooting in high contrast situations (sun in front, and big shadows/dark zones). But in air, there are no water deposits anymore in the center and around.

 

It appears that this kit uses very fine cerium oxide powder, they say it is non-abrasive but I believe the action does remove some material, I found some articles that note that Cerium oxide is a particularly effective glass polish as even though it is not particularly hard it has a combined mechanical and chemical action to help reduce hills and valleys on the surface being polished.   The article mentioned 20 nanometre/min material removal rates with mechanical polishing of glass.  This polish probably doesn't remove at that rate - it probably has finer particles and hand polishing would be much slower, but it will still remove some material. 

The concern I would have would be if the polish removed any coating on the glass surface.  Though it may be that the coating has reacted with seawater and is what is actually causing the water spotting.

[rlamarche 9]

1 hour ago, ChrisRoss said:

It appears that this kit uses very fine cerium oxide powder, they say it is non-abrasive but I believe the action does remove some material, I found some articles that note that Cerium oxide is a particularly effective glass polish as even though it is not particularly hard it has a combined mechanical and chemical action to help reduce hills and valleys on the surface being polished.   The article mentioned 20 nanometre/min material removal rates with mechanical polishing of glass.  This polish probably doesn't remove at that rate - it probably has finer particles and hand polishing would be much slower, but it will still remove some material. 

The concern I would have would be if the polish removed any coating on the glass surface.  Though it may be that the coating has reacted with seawater and is what is actually causing the water spotting.

Thank you for your insights.

Are you sure there is any coating on the glass dome ? By the way it might be possible because I haven't had any trouble with another glass wet wide angle from AOI. But I have this problem also on flat ports from Nauticam.

I'm sure that there is an anti-reflective glass coating inside the dome, and this part is in the sealed compartment so it is well protected.

But the rear of the WWL-1 has not water marks at all. So your hypothesis might be true, but the coating would have reacted to the clear water with limestone I think.

My WWL-1 made a lot of dives, I dive with it every weeks, many times, for 5 years. So not less than 500 dives, always rinsed with clear water after each dive, but not immediately after, and sometimes it was still wet more than 24h after because I did forgot to remove the hard lens cap and was not drying it.

In contrast with the typical domes, they have a neoprene cover that, I think, prevent the chemical reactions by not providing any air .. .that's an hypothesis.

I will dive with the lens and see if the quality is degraded or not. And I have a brand new WWL-1B to compare with

Edited June 11, 2021 by rlamarche

[TimG 62]

1 hour ago, ChrisRoss said:

The concern I would have would be if the polish removed any coating on the glass surface.  Though it may be that the coating has reacted with seawater and is what is actually causing the water spotting.

Really interesting thought, Chris. What is going on that causes these blooms? It has to be a chemical reaction, right? I've had around half a dozen glass ports over the last 20 years and the problem has only ever been on flat ports - never domes. I can see it starting again now on the flatport for my 105mm lens. I know I don't look after that port any differently from the domes. They never sit around with water drops on them. 

I've not yet tried Mother Waterspot Remover - although plan to (cost of mailing it is more than twice the cost of the product: but then that's still cheaper than reglassing!). But worth a shot; and maybe the suggestion from rlamarche.

[rlamarche 9]

1 hour ago, TimG said:

Really interesting thought, Chris. What is going on that causes these blooms? It has to be a chemical reaction, right? I've had around half a dozen glass ports over the last 20 years and the problem has only ever been on flat ports - never domes. I can see it starting again now on the flatport for my 105mm lens. I know I don't look after that port any differently from the domes. They never sit around with water drops on them. 

I've not yet tried Mother Waterspot Remover - although plan to (cost of mailing it is more than twice the cost of the product: but then that's still cheaper than reglassing!). But worth a shot; and maybe the suggestion from rlamarche.

What kind of cap do you use on the flat ports ? And on the domes ?

For the wwl-1 I always used the plastic hard cap, never the neoprene cover. I'm pretty sure that letting the hard cap on the dome after diving or rinsing, but still wet, would explain this chemical reaction, between the glass dome, the water (salted or not) in the air.

Using a neoprene cover might prevent this chemical reaction and would explain why you do not ever had this problem with your glass domes over the years.

[tursiops 82]

I appreciate all the posts on this subject. Now that I'm getting ready to dive again, my interest is renewed on what a good approach is.

Like Chris Ross, I'm concerned about removing the desirable coatings from the WWL-1. So my question is: Is my image quality harmed more by losing the coating, or by leaving the watermarks on the lens?

[TimG 62]

Really hard to answer that. The two occasions that I have had long-term water marks, it is VERY hard to tell whether they impact on the image or not. I'm not sure they do. But they most certainly don't look good when the system is out of the water and it's hard to believe they don't!

 

 

[rlamarche 9]

Here is the exact product I did ordered (from France) : https://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B001THF8KA/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00

I also ordered this one but the color is slightly different : https://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B005M273TM/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00

If you had seen how was my dome before rubbing it, you would not think about the coating.

The glass surface was not smooth anymore, when rubbing it with the end of the finger.

I did see some-times the "cloud" effect when facing the sun with dark zones. In air, it was always visible. In water, not always.

I don't know how to compare the image quality between the brand new WWL-1B, and the old one. Tell me if you have any idea.

Sadly I did not take a photo of the surface of the dome "before", but I can tell you that it was horrible. Now it is like new. I will dive with it tomorrow to see how it performs. Keep you updated.

Right now I'm looking for hand pad to repair the lens on the remaining surface neer the lens hood, and smaller ones for the flat macro port that has some small scratches and a few water marks - very little compared to the dome.

Edited June 11, 2021 by rlamarche

[TimG 62]

46 minutes ago, rlamarche said:

What kind of cap do you use on the flat ports ? And on the domes ?

For the wwl-1 I always used the plastic hard cap, never the neoprene cover. I'm pretty sure that letting the hard cap on the dome after diving or rinsing, but still wet, would explain this chemical reaction, between the glass dome, the water (salted or not) in the air.

Using a neoprene cover might prevent this chemical reaction and would explain why you do not ever had this problem with your glass domes over the years.

I don't use a cap at all on the flatports. Never. On the domes I use a neoprene one. 

I can see the logic of what you suggest but wouldn't that mean in some way the neoprene prevents whatever chemical reaction might be happening? Which seems a bit unlikely. Wouldn't having something like neoprene, which might actually hold a degree of salt water, actually contribute towards a chemical reaction?

[rlamarche 9]

3 minutes ago, TimG said:

Really hard to answer that. The two occasions that I have had long-term water marks, it is VERY hard to tell whether they impact on the image or not. I'm not sure they do. But they most certainly don't look good when the system is out of the water and it's hard to believe they don't!

 

 

I you look at video, while moving the camera, you can see a cloud effect moving.

On photo, most of the times it is "lost" in the details. But for sure you loose details because of these water marks, mostly contrast. Because the light coming into it is spreaded around the marks and can create ghost effects.

So for sure, coating or not, for me, it's worth removing. And this product acted as a miracle, it made my day :-D

Let's see how it performs tomorrow...

[TimG 62]

2 minutes ago, rlamarche said:

The glass surface was not smooth anymore, when rubbing it with the end of the finger.

I did see some-times the "cloud" effect when facing the sun with dark zones. In air, it was really visible. In water, not always.

Interesting. Each time  I have had this isuse I have never been able to detect any kind of abrasion on the surface of the glass. It's just that a "bloom" seems to have appeared on the surface. But you can't "feel" it. Yep, a "cloud" effect when held up to the light with dark and light patches. And, yes, not generally visible when is water.

There must be someone in the WP membership who can explain what's going on........ any chemists out there? Glass experts? 

[rlamarche 9]

9 minutes ago, TimG said:

I don't use a cap at all on the flatports. Never. On the domes I use a neoprene one. 

I can see the logic of what you suggest but wouldn't that mean in some way the neoprene prevents whatever chemical reaction might be happening? Which seems a bit unlikely. Wouldn't having something like neoprene, which might actually hold a degree of salt water, actually contribute towards a chemical reaction?

Indeed my hypothesis is hypothetic and "non expert" feeling. A friend of mine is a chemist, I'll ask him next time I see him.

My idea is that if the surface stays wet a very long time, the chemical reaction proceed. If you dry it, no reaction. And the hard cap prevent it from drying.

Maybe it depends with wich water you rinse it, I often thought about using demineralized water.

Edited June 11, 2021 by rlamarche

[tursiops 82]

My WWL seems to dry just fine under the hard cap, which does not fit that tightly. I prefer it to maintaining a wet neoprene cover over the lenses, and the hard cap give better protection for handing the camera up to a boat crew.

[ChrisRoss 150]

The water spotting I believe is caused by letting sea water dry on the lens, as the water evaporates the concentration of salts increases and sea water is alkaline so the pH would also increase.  High pH can cause etching of glass eventually. You see that in chemical labs, many solutions are stored in bottles with ground glass stoppers - but strongly alkaline solutions were always stoppered with rubber or plastic.

Increased concentration of salts during evaporation or even high concentration of volatile compounds like ammonia or hydrogen sulphide during condensation is well recognised as a corrosion mechanism in industrial situations.  The solution is always dilution or preventing the concentration getting into the corrosive range.  The same applies to glass

This is where neoprene comes into play - it keeps the surface of the lens wet until such time as you can soak it - any drying occurs on the surface of the neoprene and that is where high concentrations of salt would occur,  not on the glass surface.  I always put a lens cap on my flat ports and cover the housing with a damp towel between dives and when going home - it prevents sea water drying out on the surface..  Domes are always fitted with wet neoprene cover.  After soaking blow water off with a blower bulb and mop up residual water with a micro fibre cloth and polish.

Nauticam dome ports advertise they use an anti scratch coating on the exterior of their domes - I would assume this also occurs on the the wet optics.  The coating might be hard but may or may not be more resistant to etching, either way DONT LET SALTWATER DRY ON YOUR OPTICS!

 

[tursiops 82]

9 minutes ago, ChrisRoss said:

The water spotting I believe is caused by letting sea water dry on the lens, as the water evaporates the concentration of salts increases and sea water is alkaline so the pH would also increase.  High pH can cause etching of glass eventually. You see that in chemical labs, many solutions are stored in bottles with ground glass stoppers - but strongly alkaline solutions were always stoppered with rubber or plastic.

Increased concentration of salts during evaporation or even high concentration of volatile compounds like ammonia or hydrogen sulphide during condensation is well recognised as a corrosion mechanism in industrial situations.  The solution is always dilution or preventing the concentration getting into the corrosive range.  The same applies to glass

This is where neoprene comes into play - it keeps the surface of the lens wet until such time as you can soak it - any drying occurs on the surface of the neoprene and that is where high concentrations of salt would occur,  not on the glass surface.  I always put a lens cap on my flat ports and cover the housing with a damp towel between dives and when going home - it prevents sea water drying out on the surface..  Domes are always fitted with wet neoprene cover.  After soaking blow water off with a blower bulb and mop up residual water with a micro fibre cloth and polish.

Nauticam dome ports advertise they use an anti scratch coating on the exterior of their domes - I would assume this also occurs on the the wet optics.  The coating might be hard but may or may not be more resistant to etching, either way DONT LET SALTWATER DRY ON YOUR OPTICS!

 

Well, the thorough explanation is much appreciated, but not much helpful, since the saltwater appears to have already dried. The horse is already out of the barn.

The issue is what to do now? Let it be? Or try and polish it off? If it is mostly a cosmetic thing, let it be. If it affects IQ, then does polishing and thus removing some glass, make the IQ worse? Or the same? Or better? I know, it is a "it depends" kind of question. So what diagnostic might I use to decide whether to leave it as is, or attack it?

[ChrisRoss 150]

16 minutes ago, tursiops said:

Well, the thorough explanation is much appreciated, but not much helpful, since the saltwater appears to have already dried. The horse is already out of the barn.

The issue is what to do now? Let it be? Or try and polish it off? If it is mostly a cosmetic thing, let it be. If it affects IQ, then does polishing and thus removing some glass, make the IQ worse? Or the same? Or better? I know, it is a "it depends" kind of question. So what diagnostic might I use to decide whether to leave it as is, or attack it?

Well the best solution is prevention and others may benefit from seeing reasons to keep their port wet until it can be soaked.  These forums are a resource to both the person asking for a solution and to the many others reading them afterwards!

As to what to do now that is difficult to answer, many times the damage does not appear in images - in which case leave well alone and practice prevention from now on.  In the case where you an see the damage in images or indeed you can feel the etching with your finger then you have little to lose by polishing.

The problem arises as there is doubt about whether the optic has a coating and if so what it's function is.  Nauticam state their domes have an anti scratch coating in which case little optical harm may come from polishing it??  But the if the optics are impacted by the problem already, polishing is probably a good solution.  Coatings are usually visible and partially removing the coating would be seen in a change of reflectivity visible in certain light.  If after polishing no such un-eveness is seen you are probably OK?

This is all speculation as we really don't know if the polish is impacting any coating of just smoothing it out.  If it were an anti reflection coating changing the thickness of that would result in a change in the wavelength where minimum reflectivity occurs.  I suspect this would be visible as differing reflectivity over the surface of the dome.  

[Davide DB 602]

Don't know anyone in Nauticam or Subal who can answer this?

I imagine that they will see many ports in these conditions and that they will be able to answer about the origins of the chemical phenomenon and its solution and maybe even if the WWL1 or other glass domes have a coating.

[Hmmm 6]

I just recently removed water marks on a wwl1 hand polishing cerium oxide, just a jewlers suppiled powder. Took ages but it worked. I used a micro fibre cloth to hand polish. Also, before the polish, the water tension would break badly when doing underovers, i use an oring to keep the water between the wwl1 and macro 35 port. Now the water sticks much much better and longer to the front of the wwl1. Win win. 

[TimG 62]

Just an update: I've just used Mother Waterspot Remover and, yep, it's done the trick and removed the bloom from my Subal flat port.

So a BIG Thanks to Gudge on that one. 

 

[Davide DB 602]

On 8/3/2021 at 7:23 PM, TimG said:

Just an update: I've just used Mother Waterspot Remover and, yep, it's done the trick and removed the bloom from my Subal flat port.

So a BIG Thanks to Gudge on that one. 

 

Do you think will it remove the coating too?